Asteroid Could Hit Earth in 2032

[Waspie_Dwarf]

400-Meter-Wide Asteroid Could Hit Earth in 2032

MOSCOW, October 17 (RIA Novosti) – Ukrainian astronomers have discovered a large asteroid that could hit Earth in 2032, though the impact risk is minimal, according to current estimates.

The 410-meter-wide (1,350-foot) minor planet, which has been named 2013 TV135, was first discovered last weekend by the Crimean Astrophysical Observatory in southern Ukraine, according to the International Astronomer Union’s Minor Planet Center

Read more...

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Asteroid 2013 TV135 – A Reality Check

A Newly discovered asteroid 2013 TV135 made a close approach to Earth on Sept. 16, when it came within about 4.2 million miles (6.7 million kilometers). The asteroid is initially estimated to be about 1,300 feet (400 meters) in size and its orbit carries it as far out as about three quarters of the distance to Jupiter's orbit and as close to the sun as Earth's orbit. It was discovered on Oct. 8, 2013, by astronomers working at the Crimean Astrophysical Observatory in Ukraine. As of Oct. 14, asteroid 2013 TV135 is one of 10,332 near-Earth objects that have been discovered.

Read more...

[krypter3]

If you think about it on a cosmic scale...1 in like 63 thousand chance is pretty bad odds o.O

[Prab]

"With more observations, I fully expect we will be able to significantly reduce, or rule out entirely, any impact probability for the foreseeable future."

What has science come to, setting a result before calculating and trying to achieve that result.

Why not say,"We will be able to more accurately tell about the trajectory and the probability of collision, which may further reduce."

[Hazzard]

This is a none-event. And a 1300ft meteor is hardley a "global killer" even if it did hit.

Glad we are looking up though.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

What has science come to, setting a result before calculating and trying to achieve that result.

Calculating a result is EXACTLY what scientists have done. That result is that we have a one in 63,000 chance of being hit. Do you think this number was just pulled out of thin air?

Astronomers know that, until they have more precise measurements, that there is a degree of uncertainty as to exactly where that asteroid will be in 2032. They also know what that level of uncertainty is. They can, therefore predict where the asteroid will be ± a known amount.

What do you suggest they do, wait until after an object hits us to work out the hazard? If we are to defend ourselves against such threats we need to know which objects are actually hazardous. If the probability of an impact is zero then it can be ignored. This object currently has a small but finite possibility of hitting us in 2032 and therefore is an object which warrants further observations.

Why not say,"We will be able to more accurately tell about the trajectory and the probability of collision, which may further reduce."

They DID say that. You even quoted them as saying that. What is your point? Saying that they maybe able to further reduce the odds of an impact is NOT incompatible with quoting the chances of an impacted, based on currently available data, as being 1 in 63,000.

This is a none-event.

Given that the best astronomers in the world can't guarantee this you are certain how exactly?

And a 1300ft meteor is hardley a "global killer" even if it did hit.

Such an object would just release energy close to 50,000 MT of TNT (just about 3 million times more powerful than the nuclear weapon dropped on Hiroshima). It would cause a crater 15km in diameter. The death toll would be in the tens or hundreds of millions instantly, with many millions dying as a result of the "nuclear winter" that would follow.

It may not cause the extinction of mankind but it would decimate the population.

Some "none event"!

[highdesert50]

Perhaps to allay some asteroid impact concerns, last month Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz signed an agreement with Russia for new collaboration between nuclear weapons scientists in everything from plutonium-fueled reactors to lasers and explosives research.

[bassai26]

never underestimate the remaining .002 percent

[Maars]

never underestimate the remaining .002 percent

That's what I am thiinking as well.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

never underestimate the remaining .002 percent

We human beings have a very poor grasp of risk and hazard.

If someone was to try and build a factory which had a 1 in 63,000 chance of having an accident that would result in the deaths of 100,000,000 people it would never be allowed to be built. Yet an asteroid with the same odds is dismissed as a non-event.

[freetoroam]

Nice to see they are taking no chances this time.

The object should be easily observable in the coming months and once additional observations are provided to the Minor Planet Center in Cambridge, Mass., the initial orbit calculations will be improved and the most likely result will be a dramatic reduction, or complete elimination, of any risk of Earth impact.

"To put it another way, that puts the current probability of no impact in 2032 at about 99.998 percent,"

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/asteroids/news/asteroid20131017.html#.UmExLxD1zig

I like the positive attitude, can they guarantee this though? NOT if its a "most likely", but trust they will keep up informed.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Nice to see they are taking no chances this time.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. This is the same calculation done for EVERY NEO asteroid when they are detected.

I like the positive attitude, can they guarantee this though? NOT if its a "most likely", but trust they will keep up informed.

Guarantee what exactly?

That there is a 1 in 63,000 chance that it will hit us? They are 100% certain of that.

That it won't hit us? No they can't guarantee it, that is why they have given the odds of an impact.

Can they guarantee that the odds will fall with more observations? Of course not, if they could they wouldn't need further observations.

[Stegosaurus]

Oh goodness.

[33SD]

I made a mistake, sorry.

Edited October 24, 2013 by 33SD

[33SD]

You know like when someone creates a bunch words by chopping them up,moving them like three-card monte and really makes them sound like,like something but they're not!the sentences have a beet but it means nothing! Oh, do not mesmerize me with a paragraph. Same thing, only difference would be the reward. The 3-card most likely has unresolved mental issues. These people on the other hand,went to college for this so I would guess funding would be a priority.Aye,if one creates something that with mere words is worth a few mil in grants. It's possible that I will not be around to find out what it feels like to get smashed by an meteor.I'd rather wait for Jesus.Why would I care? It's good reading though.

Edited October 24, 2013 by 33SD

[Frank Merton]

We human beings have a very poor grasp of risk and hazard.

If someone was to try and build a factory which had a 1 in 63,000 chance of having an accident that would result in the deaths of 100,000,000 people it would never be allowed to be built. Yet an asteroid with the same odds is dismissed as a non-event.

What I was taught when I once in ancient history took a "risk management" class was to multiply the odds and the consequences. If the consequence is the end of civilization as we know it, then one does not undertake the risk at any odds whatever (what is the product of zero and infinity?).

[Rlyeh]

You know like when someone creates a bunch words by chopping them up,moving them like three-card monte and really makes them sound like,like something but they're not!the sentences have a beet but it means nothing! Oh, do not mesmerize me with a paragraph. Same thing, only difference would be the reward. The 3-card most likely has unresolved mental issues. These people on the other hand,went to college for this so I would guess funding would be a priority.Aye,if one creates something that with mere words is worth a few mil in grants. It's possible that I will not be around to find out what it feels like to get smashed by an meteor.I'd rather wait for Jesus.Why would I care? It's good reading though.

You'd rather wait for Jesus to smash you? Sorry that's all I got from that gibberish.

[aearluin]

I think 1 in 63000 deserves some level of worry!!!!! I wouldn't definitely not drive a car with a 1:63000 chance of exploding under me!

[Frank Merton]

I think 1 in 63000 deserves some level of worry!!!!! I wouldn't definitely not drive a car with a 1:63000 chance of exploding under me!

Oh I am quite sure that it will be watched and the orbit constantly recalculated and if those odds begin to shrink we will hear about it. I doubt that will happen -- indeed the odds are greatly in favor of the odds increasing.

[White Crane Feather]

I think 1 in 63000 deserves some level of worry!!!!! I wouldn't definitely not drive a car with a 1:63000 chance of exploding under me!

Are you sure about that. The chances of dieing in a fatal car crash are actually a lot less. For children it's 1 in 23,000.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Impact Risk Hiked for 400-Meter-Wide Asteroid - NASA

MOSCOW, October 24 (RIA Novosti) - NASA has upgraded the impact risk for a massive asteroid recently discovered by Ukrainian observers that will pass close to the Earth in 2032, although a collision remains unlikely.

According to an update on NASA's Near Earth Object Program site, the impact risk is now 1 in 9,090; up from 1 in 63,000 at the time the asteroid, identified as 2013 TV135, was discovered.

Read more...

Edited October 25, 2013 by Waspie_Dwarf

[freetoroam]

I'm not sure what you mean by this. This is the same calculation done for EVERY NEO asteroid when they are detected.

Guarantee what exactly?

That there is a 1 in 63,000 chance that it will hit us? They are 100% certain of that.

That it won't hit us? No they can't guarantee it, that is why they have given the odds of an impact.

Can they guarantee that the odds will fall with more observations? Of course not, if they could they wouldn't need further observations.

NOT ANY MORE!!!

[Waspie_Dwarf]

NOT ANY MORE!!!

The beauty of science is that it is not so arrogant as to presume it is always right. It constantly checks itself, refines itself and comes to new conclusions based on new data.

That figure was correct at the time I quoted it.

And by the way I notice you didn't highlight this part of what I said,

Can they guarantee that the odds will fall with more observations? Of course not, if they could they wouldn't need further observations.

which is a shame as it might have demonstrated an iota of comprehension on your part.

[freetoroam]

The beauty of science is that it is not so arrogant as to presume it is always right. It constantly checks itself, refines itself and comes to new conclusions based on new data.

That figure was correct at the time I quoted it.

And by the way I notice you didn't highlight this part of what I said,

which is a shame as it might have demonstrated an iota of comprehension on your part.

I did not highlight it because the question had already been asked in relation to the story,

Posted 21 October 2013 - 02:20 PM

I like the positive attitude, can they guarantee this though? NOT if its a "most likely", but trust they will keep up informed.

you are the one who put the 100% bit down about the odds, they calculated it, but it was not 100% if it could change, ( hence the reason I questioned the "most likely" bit). as you pointed out, UNTIL they have precise measurements, they do not know.......so how can they be 100% certain when even you say the measurements are not precise?

[aearluin]

Are you sure about that. The chances of dieing in a fatal car crash are actually a lot less. For children it's 1 in 23,000.

Yes, of course. However, I believe that the chance of being in a fatal car crash is not random. People who drive more safely will have a much lower chance of crashing that people who take more risks. So if you are carefull I thikn the chance of dying in a car crash would be much lower than de 1 in 63000 chance of the asteroid hitting us. No ?